SIDDIQUE BUDHANI vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a financial scam dating back to 1990, wherein the management of Messrs Hyderabad Electronic Industry Limited allegedly forged ownership documents of an industrial plot to secure a collusive loan of Rs. 1,62,00,000 from Doha Bank Limited. The applicant, Siddique Budhani, a General Manager of the company, was named as an absconding accused in the final challan submitted on June 22, 2002, and subsequently sought pre-arrest bail. The core legal question concerned whether the applicant's act of signing an account opening form implicated him in the fraudulent loan transaction. The Sindh High Court confirmed the interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant, holding that he had not signed any documents relating to the controversial financial facility and noting that his case was identical to another co-accused who had already been granted bail, thereby applying the doctrine of consistency. The key principle laid down is that pre-arrest bail may be confirmed where an accused's role is limited to routine administrative acts unconnected to the core fraud and is identical to that of a co-accused already granted bail.
- Whether pre-arrest bail can be confirmed when an accused's role is limited to signing an account opening form without participating in the fraudulent loan transaction?
- Does the doctrine of consistency apply when granting bail to an accused whose case is identical to that of a co-accused already released on bail?
ORDER
1. ' MUHAMMAD SADIQ LEGHARI, J.---Present case relates to a financial scam of 1990. According to the prosecution Zikiriya Ghani, the Managing Director of Messrs Hyderabad Electronic Industry Limited in collusion with other directors and employees of the company including Abdul Wahab Ghani, 'dress Ghani and Abdul Rauf Deewan fraudulently prepared/forged ownership documents in respect of Plot No,47, Sector No,15, Korangi Industrial Area, Karachi and then arranged a collusive financial facility/loan of Rs,1,62,00,000 from Messrs Doha Bank Limited. The loan was obtained in the name of Messrs Hyderabad Electronic Industries Limited.
2. ' The case of the alleged fraud was registered on 21-7-1998. After prolonged investigation final challan/report was submitted on 22-6-2002. In that report the applicant Siddique Budhani, was shown as one of the absconding accused. By order dated 17-10-2002, the applicant was granted interim pre-arrest bail.
3. ' While arguing the application Mr. Salim Salam Ansari, learned counsel for the applicant contended that the only evidence against the applicant is in capacity of its ' General Manager had signed the account opening form of Current Account No,323 opened in the name of Messrs Hyderabad Electronic Industries Limited. According to the learned counsel, by signing his account opening form in that capacity, the applicant did not play any role in the financial scam. Clarifying his contention the learned counsel stated that the opening of account by Zikiriya Ghani was much before the processing of the loan case and sanction thereof. That the applicant had never signed any document relating to the financial facility in question.
4. ' The learned State counsel did not controvert the contentions of the learned counsel for the applicant. He stated that the case of the applicant Siddique Budhani is identical to that of Accused Oan Ali, who has already been granted bail in this case, therefore, the applicant deserves the same concession in view of the doctrine of consistency.
5. ' Taking into account the undisputed position that the applicant had not signed any document relating to this controversial financial facility interim bail granted to the applicant is hereby confirmed on same terms and conditions.